NEW consultation requirements for persons affected by reconstruction projects under the National Reconstruction and Resilience Authority (NaRRA) was one of 20 amendments made to the Bill during an extended sitting of the House of Representatives that stretched into early Wednesday morning.

The Government accepted the consultation-related changes following concerns raised by civil society groups, but rejected Opposition proposals for a governing board that would oversee the authority and provide accountability for the chief executive officer’s operations and decision-making.

The legislation establishes NaRRA as a body intended to coordinate post-disaster rebuilding and resilience efforts following the devastation caused by Hurricane Melissa, which the Bill describes as the strongest hurricane landfalling in Jamaica’s history. The law also seeks to fast-track major public and private investment projects considered important to economic recovery and national resilience.

One of the most significant amendments approved during the committee stage came under Clause 17, where lawmakers inserted a provision requiring the authority to “hold consultations with persons affected or likely to be affected by the implementation of a project”. The amendment followed concerns from civil society groups and Opposition members that the original legislation did not clearly spell out consultation obligations.

Opposition Leader Mark Golding argued that an earlier version of the amendment circulated during the debate would have provided stronger protections by specifically identifying vulnerable groups that should be consulted

The earlier draft amendment, which was later shortened by the Government, specified that the authority would be required to hold consultations with affected communities, non-governmental organisations, women, persons with disabilities, the elderly, children and youth, as well as conduct periodic meetings every six months to receive feedback on projects and related activities.

“Now that’s a much more comprehensive requirement than this very truncated version which just says that in developing and for monitoring the implementation… hold consultations, but it doesn’t say, it doesn’t go into any kind of detail as to who should be included,” Golding said.

Government members insisted the broader wording would prevent the legislation from unintentionally restricting participation.

Leader of Government Business Floyd Green defended the amendment, arguing that listing specific categories could narrow the scope of consultations and potentially delay implementation.

“This gives the authority a wider breadth in terms of consultation, because it subsumes all the categories without individually listing them. And this is a much better approach, this gives us a wider array based on what is put in this new dispensation,” Green said.

Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness similarly maintained that the Government’s policy position was always to ensure broad engagement with communities.

“The policy direction is we want the broadest consultations, and I believe the way in which the drafters have coined it in the clause gives a wider breadth than for us to go to name specific categories, which could be limited,” Holness told lawmakers.

While the Government accepted changes relating to consultations and reporting requirements, it resisted attempts to alter some of the Bill’s most controversial governance provisions.

A major flashpoint emerged around Clause 7, which remained unchanged despite Opposition attempts to establish a governing board for the authority. Golding proposed that the board comprise between five and nine members responsible for providing oversight of the authority and the chief executive officer.

“Madam Chair, the authority is going to be administering billions and billions of dollars of expenditure, much of which will be borrowed from international partners and with interest. It is necessary that the chief executive officer has to report to a body that can give effective oversight over how that person is conducting the affairs of the authority and all the more in the low-trust environment that exists in Jamaica,” Golding argued.

The Government rejected the proposal, maintaining that the authority was deliberately designed as an executive body focused on rapid implementation rather than traditional corporate governance structures.

Holness argued that introducing a board could slow decision-making during a national reconstruction effort.

“Where there is a very specific task for an entity to execute in a very well defined period, the need to have a board that will exercise discretion, interpret policy and deal with issues to do with the day-to-day management of the entity, those issues would not arise in this instance of an entity where the direction is specific and all that is needed to do is to execute,” the prime minister said.

Several other contentious clauses also survived without amendment.

Clause 5, which allows the prime minister to appoint the chief executive officer of the authority by instrument in writing, remained unchanged despite concerns from Opposition members about concentration of executive authority.

Clause 6, which permits the authority and the chief executive officer to delegate functions “to any person” with ministerial approval, also remained intact after concerns were raised during the debate that the wording was overly broad and lacked safeguards relating to competence and transparency.

Government Member of Parliament Marlene Malahoo Forte, representing St James West Central, questioned whether the legislation should contain clearer qualifications for persons receiving delegated authority, given the technical nature of many of the functions under the Bill.

“All I’m saying is that ‘any person’ needs a qualifier, because it has to be someone who is duly competent to carry out the functions. These are technical functions,” Malahoo Forte said during discussions on the clause.

The House also left untouched some of the Bill’s broad powers relating to project approvals and implementation.

Clauses 21 to 24, which were not amended during the committee stage, allow the authority to coordinate and expedite approvals for reconstruction and strategic investment projects, issue directives to approving agencies and, in some circumstances, allow the minister to issue “step-in orders” overriding delays by approving entities.

Another clause that remained unchanged was Clause 25, which empowers Cabinet to designate projects valued at US$15 million or more as “strategic investment projects” in sectors ranging from tourism and agriculture to logistics, healthcare, housing and mining.

Among the amendments approved by lawmakers was a change to Clause 9 dealing with auditing arrangements. The original provision allowed the authority’s auditor to be appointed by the chief executive officer with approval from the cabinet secretary. The amended clause instead places that appointment power with the cabinet secretary, subject to Cabinet approval.

The House also approved amendments to Clause 10 requiring the chief executive officer to submit reports every six months to the minister, with copies to be tabled in both Houses of Parliament.

Legislators also amended Clause 20 to broaden the official register of projects maintained by the authority so that it will now include not only Government-approved reconstruction and resilience projects, but also designated strategic investment projects involving the private sector. The amendment further requires the register to identify the promoter behind each project, making it easier for the public to see who is responsible for developments being facilitated under the legislation.

Another major change came through a new clause that exempts approved reconstruction and strategic investment projects from certain Public Investment Management System requirements under the Financial Administration and Audit Act, potentially allowing some projects to move through the approval process more quickly.